Field Test: Canon PowerShot G5 X on the Olympic Peninsula

Mr. Rose, you still have not addressed accusations that you forced people to watch a fishing video.

Also, you brought this camera on a small fishing boat because it was a free camera offered by the sponsor ;-) Not even a strap!
I'm not sure I would do this with mine!
The sample images and videos are nice though. I like the DR and the very pleasant colors.
Although it is "sponsored content", these field tests are informative. They show nicely how the cameras can be handled.

Nikon DL and G7X mkII will come too late. I will need it in ~ 1 month.

i very much doubt any of the content you're referring to is sponsored unless is was a video field test, and was clearly signposted as being sponsored content.

Perhaps so, but I did not see the signpost at all.

Simon, I'm sure you know better than I the various means of sponsorship available to marketers. I remember a writer of another blog saying Sony offered an RX1r ii as a thankyou gift for an article. Did any DpReview staff or writers aquire Sony 'gifts' in this period?

A certain low light autofocus test (but not limited too) that'd have made Ken Rockwell proud comes to mind

Transparency is a good thing. As a result of the Lord & Taylor vs. FTC legal settlement, for those doing business in the U.S., transparency in content marketing is now also a legally-required thing, particularly for big players (like Amazon!) that the FTC has the resources to address.

That aside, for any media company that derives significant income from a party over which it passes judgement, (regardless of "stated policies") that company's employees will always have to ask "if we say x about business y will we still receive $z dollars from them?"

For me, I couldn't watch this video after I saw that it was content marketing. And I now feel like I have to audit everything I read on this website to see whether or not it is a content marketing piece. Which makes it more difficult for me to enjoy. Of course, I have no idea if I am or am not representative of the greater visitor/user base at DPR.

I'd be interested in learning more about why you cannot watch the video once you know that it is sponsored content. At a high level I understand the gut-response to words like "sponsored" or "marketing".

But the reality for us is that we had a relatively simple goal, to make incremental content about photographers and gear that we otherwise could not afford to make. So we sat down and asked ourselves what format would make sense, and settled on this video series, where we pair a camera with a photographer, and go off to use the gear in interesting situations.

We feel good about the video series because we do not consult with the camera companies at any stage. Our editors choose a camera they want to highlight, an interesting match for a photographer and a location, and we go off and shoot. There's no additional layer of complexity or mystery.

So in the end, we are able to make videos that we'd love to be able to make anyways, and the feedback from our users has been extremely positive.

Good stuff Scott except I am sure DPReview has ample resources for a modest video shoot like this. There was a time when entities like yours would purchase any cameras that they review.

@Gesture, I wish this were true, but DPReview's business model is based on selling online advertising. And banner advertising in general is dying a slow death. It will always be there, but the rates advertisers are willing to pay have been going down for years. This is a big reason for the rise in sponsored content. If you look across the web at different types of publishers, the ones thriving are the ones able to find a way to make sponsored content that their readers enjoy.

Anyways, our entire annual budget, beyond paying our staff, goes to freelance writers. Video production rates vary, but generally you will see about $1000/minute as the absolute lowest rate, and generally most production teams will not take projects below $5000-10,000, and this does not factor in travel expenses, paying the talent, etc.... So a 10-15 minute mini-documentary is a costly affair, much beyond our budget.

@Scott, You asked "I'd be interested in learning more about why you cannot watch the video once you know that it is sponsored content" -- My response would largely match your high-level understanding of "gut-response to words like 'sponsored' or 'marketing'". Additionally, I cringe when those words weren't mentioned before I decided to click on the article -- I feel baited. There's only so many hours in a day for all of us and I'm sure in our personal lives many of us tend to prioritize the product info that we are confident is giving us the most full, candid story.

As someone very involved with digital media myself, I empathize greatly with creating diff content for diff users/visitors. As you state, "feedback from our users has been extremely positive", so that hopefully keeps a site we all love thriving.

A 'question mark' (perhaps you've already considered??), is whether to label sponsored-content as such, up-front on the homepage (The Atlantic's Quartz does this for example).

Which comparable camera is priced at $550?

Sony rx100 m2

$550 at Dell and walmart

Not a comparable camera.

G5X is 749,90 Euros in Finland at the moment and you can buy EOS 750D KIT 18-55 IS STM or EOS 760D body with 779,90 € from the same shop.
Thats why i think G5X is too expensive.